*** Husker FB Misc Topic bullsh#t Thread ***

Hagg said:
I read those sentiments and pretty much agree.  We were spoiled beyond common sense back then.  Common sense, or at least a better football world view, would not have allowed the removal of that staff.  Perhaps some internal discussion, but not their ejection.  That 7-7 (2002) season was corrected the very next year. 

But, you know the "Frank Solich Curse," or much other discussion with his name, probably has nothing new to offer;  it got wrung out pretty thoroughly here there and everywhere over the ensuing years. 
Click to expand...
I was thinking that the fumble against Texas on the 1 yard line cost us more than 1 lost game:  

1. Cost us the NC championship as it was highly likely we would have beaten either VT or FSU that year.

2. Frank, without that NC,  did not gain the grace that a NC would have given him.  Getting beaten badly in the NC in 2001 gained him no grace.

3. If Frank had won the NC in 1999, I don't think Peterson would have had the balls to fire him after a 10-3 2003 season. 

4.  Frank with new staff improves the team overall and we probably settle into a 9-11 win type of team. 

5.  The malaise of the past 12 years or so is avoided.  

 
TGHusker said:
3. If Frank had won the NC in 1999, I don't think Peterson would have had the balls to fire him after a 10-3 2003 season. 
Click to expand...
One correction.

Peterson would not have been hired to fire Solich after a 10-3 season.  I believe he was brought in with specific instructions to get rid of Solich.

 
I watched the SMU vs Clemson game and I couldn’t help notice the big difference a mobile QB has on the game. Comparing SMU QB to Raiola, one can only wonder if Raiola will ever be successful in the BIG. He is slow and doesn’t have good pocket presence which makes it harder for him to get away from blitzes. He either has to learn to release the ball very quickly or may be learn when to run for the first down. Being able to escape the pressure opens up many options. 

 
huskerfan74 said:
I watched the SMU vs Clemson game and I couldn’t help notice the big difference a mobile QB has on the game. Comparing SMU QB to Raiola, one can only wonder if Raiola will ever be successful in the BIG. He is slow and doesn’t have good pocket presence which makes it harder for him to get away from blitzes. He either has to learn to release the ball very quickly or may be learn when to run for the first down. Being able to escape the pressure opens up many options. 
Click to expand...


Dual-threat QBs are arguably a dying breed at this point. In 2016, there were five Big Ten QBs who averaged 22+ rushing yards per game. This year there's only one.

I think these days coaches really want QBs to be solid, reliable passers first and foremost. They don't want to deal with the kind of inconsistencies we've seen so much from 'dual-threat' guys.

As for Raiola's pocket presence, I'd say it's been a mixed bag so far. Sometimes he looks poised and aware, but sometimes he gets rattled. He's had some good scrambles like that 38 yarder against Ohio State. Hopefully he can continue to develop in that area.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top